Paper short abstract:

In this paper we will discuss the results of two recent ethnographic case studies on video-surveillance and ‘proximity policing’, showing how both tend to be maintained as open projects and not so much as the result of a concrete and thoughtful public policy.

Paper long abstract:

Since the restoration of democracy in 1974 and the adhesion to the EU in 1986, Portugal has been building a political/legal apparatus in security issues. Portuguese institutions have been combining a 'guarantistic legal order' and a more global trend that emphasize 'securitization'.

Nevertheless, 'modernization' has been, in many occasions, the leitmotif for institutional reforms, and not so much the criminal environment or the real sense of Portugal as an insecure country per se (all data estimates that the country is one of the 'safest' in Europe).

Restoring the institutions, bureaucratic control within public management, and its democratic legitimacy for action, has been the basis for the debate around the most fundamental policies and agencies of public security. Likewise, having the political and the institutional such a strength in policies, rhetoric and public opinion, it seems that questions related to security praxis, policing and surveillance actions has been postponed and not seriously taken to improve public debate besides the one engaging decision-makers, legal agencies and police institutions. In other words, citizens and non-governmental organizations has been stepped aside a discussion which directly involves them and their daily lives.

Anthropology may contribute to produce substantive knowledge about security issues and to instigate new focus on security dispositions, actions and its effects on people's lives. In this paper we will discuss the results of two recent ethnographic case studies on video-surveillance and 'proximity policing', showing how both tend to be maintained as open projects and not so much as the result of a concrete and thoughtful public policy.